Rick Baker Thought Posts
Left Menu Space Holder

About the author

Name of author Rick Baker, P.Eng.

E-mail me Send mail
Follow me LinkedIn Twitter

Search

Calendar

<<  April 2024  >>
MoTuWeThFrSaSu
25262728293031
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293012345

View posts in large calendar

Recent Comments

Comment RSS

Manufacturing: Adaptability, Excellence, Attitude…and Passion

by Rick Baker
On May 25, 2010
My friend Paul Hogendoorn is President of OES, Inc in London, Ontario.
 
OES is a leader in the advanced electronics sector…check out their website  www.oes-inc.com .
 
Paul also writes articles for Manufacturing Automation magazine. www.automationmag.com.
 
Since a summary will not capture his message anywhere near as well as Paul conveys it, I have provided a complete copy of his May 2010 column “Passion: The Fourth Ingredient”.
 
Enjoy!
 
***
 
Passion: The Fourth Ingredient
By Paul Hogendoorn
 
George Harrison, a Dallas Mavericks’ game, and a cab ride to the airport. How could these topics have anything at all to do with a column about the manufacturing industry today? The editors of this fine magazine have graciously extended me a lot of latitude over years – let’s see if they let me try to put this one together!
 
Actually, it won’t be too much of a stretch at all. In previous columns, I have written about what I believe are 3 of the key ingredients for survival in the manufacturing industry today: adaptability, excellence and attitude. The fourth ingredient, in my mind, is “passion”.
 
Last month I was in Dallas and was watching the Maverick’s play the Lakers. One of my company’s divisions designs and manufactures scoreboards, and Dallas is one of “our” venues. During one break in the action, the camera spotted a couple of celebrities in attendance and put their faces on the big video board. The crowd erupted in spontaneous applause and the celebrities smiled and waved graciously. I had no idea who they were, so I leaned over and asked a colleague sitting beside me. But, since he was in my age bracket, he was equally clueless. We started polling the people immediately around us until we got to a couple in their late teens or early twenties. “It’s Beyonce and Jay Z” they said incredulously, amazed that we didn’t recognize these two mega-stars.
 
I had heard of the names and through my kids, probably had heard some of their music too. But it wasn’t “my” music, from my era – an era that I would describe as “when music mattered”. I don’t want to argue that music in my era was the best, or most creative, or most popular, but I think I can make a strong case that music in my era – the last 60’s and early 70’s – mattered more than music before it or after it. The music of that day tried to actually change the world, a truly audacious objective - and in a lot of ways it did. There were all the songs about “peace” trying to stop the war in Viet Nam; about “love”, trying to change society’s focus from capitalism to personal enlightenment; about a new generation coming of age, with anti-establishment protest songs heralding their arrival. And then there was George Harrison’s classic two-record masterpiece, drawing our attention to the poverty and misery in Bangladesh.
 
My colleague was in complete agreement with me. John Lennon, The Who, CCR – so many of the bands and musicians of that day had something important to say. It wasn’t really their music that was trying to change the world though – it was their passion that was. Their music was their means of change, but the power that drove it was their passion to effect change. There are many today that suggest that the changes in the USSR that led to the eventual dismantling of the Iron Curtain and the tearing down of the Berlin Wall began when the Beatles first toured Russia and a new generation had been awakened with a fresh sense of their own ideals, ambition and identity.
 
Today, we have many companies in need of life saving change. They are holding on by their fingernails, hoping for “the economy to turn around”, or a life saving concession from their workforce, or a government guarantee or bailout. But what they really need is what I wrote about in 3 of my previous columns – an ability to adapt quickly, a focus on excellence, and an all-inclusive change in attitudes. And, they need world changing passion; a passion strong enough to change their world.
 
The next morning, I took the shuttle to the airport. In a casual conversation with the driver, he told me was from Bangladesh. “Do you know anything about Bangladesh?” he asked me. “Only what I know from George Harrison” I replied. “Oh, George Harrison” he says breaking into a reverent smile, “He is a true hero in my country, everyone knows about him!”. He goes on to tell me that in his hometown there is a big museum dedicated solely to him, about how he drew the world’s attention to that country, how the country has never been the same, and that there’s a picture of his face that covers an entire wall. George Harrison did change their world with his music, but it was far more than his talent for writing words and creating melodies, it was his passion and commitment for that cause.
 
Passion is what makes you go on when logic tells you to stop. Passion is what makes you deaf to unbelievers and blind to distractions. A good idea may attract people to your cause for a quick look- and-see, but passion is what keeps them there. Passion is what makes your efforts powerful beyond simple strength; it’s the critical ingredient needed to change a world.   
 
Paul Hogendoorn is president of OES, Inc. and chair of the London Region Manufacturing Council. He can be reached at [email protected]. This column was originally published in the May 2010 edition of Manufacturing Automation.
 
***
 
Thank you, Paul.

Tags:

Entrepreneur Thinking | Hero Worship

10 Rules for Building a Great Organization

by Rick Baker
On Mar 30, 2010
My friend, Ben Bach, thoughtfully loaned me his copy of the book ‘Enough. True Measures of Money, Business, and Life’, written by John C. Bogle, the founder and former CEO of Vanguard Mutual Fund Group.
 
 
I recommend the book to anyone interested in understanding the current status of capitalism. Of more importance, John C. Bogle offers clear ideas on how we can help build a better future for our businesses and for our investments [and for generations to follow].
 
I will be picking up a copy of ‘Enough.’ for my library.   [some personal comments at the footnote]
 
Here is a sample of John C. Bogle’s wisdom…
 
10 Rules For Building a Great Business
 
Rule 1: Make Caring the Soul of the Organization
 
Rule 2: Forget about Employees (the word hardly suggests teamwork and cooperation at Vanguard, Bogle uses 'crew member'…see footnote for an explanation)
 
Rule 3: Set High Standards and Values - and Stick to Them
 
Rule 4: Talk the Talk, Repeat the Values Endlessly
 
Rule 5: Walk the Walk, Actions Speak Louder than Words
 
Rule 6: Don't Overmanage
 
Rule 7: Recognize Individual Achievement
 
Rule 8: A Reminder - Loyalty Is a Two-Way Street
 
Rule 9: Lead and Manage for the Long Term
 
Rule 10: Press On, Regardless
 
Footnote: John C. Bogle is an avid admirer of Lord Horatio Nelson. We have that in common. Lord Nelson is very high on my list of historic heroes. Nelson inspired a nation to heights rarely accomplished and his legacy lives on in the hearts of many. In honour of his ‘patron saint’, Admiral Nelson, Bogle decided to remove the word employee from his company’s lexicon and instead call his people crew members. [PS: Bogle also named his company Vanguard out of respect for Lord Nelson.]
 
 
More about Standards and Values [Rules 3 and 4] in future blogs…

Tags:

Hero Worship | INSPIRE PEOPLE - GROW PROFITS! | Master Rules | Values: Personal Values

The Eighth Step Toward Riches - or - The First Mental Trap?

by Rick Baker
On Feb 3, 2009

In 1937, in his classic book 'Think and Grow Rich', Napoleon Hill stated Persistence as the 8th of 13 steps toward riches.

If I'm not mistaken, Bob Proctor stated he forced himself to read the Persistence chapter of Think and Grow Rich every night for a month. Proctor did that to impress upon himself the merit of Hill's words about Persistence...ie, an exercise of leading the mind by example.  

An excerpt of Napoleon Hill thought... 

'There may be no heroic connotation to the word "persistence", but the quality is to the character of man what carbon is to steel.' 

Another quote... 

'Lack of persistence is one of the major causes of failure.' 

Another... 

'Those who have cultivated the habit of persistence seem to enjoy insurance against failure.' 

And one more... 

'One of the most common causes of failure is the habit of quitting when one is overtaken by temporary defeat.' 

***

I recently purchased a copy of André Kukla's 2007 (Anchor Canada) publication of 'Mental Traps - Overthinker's Guide to a Happier Life'. Now, the book title caught my attention. The back cover explains André Kukla is a Professor Emeritus at the University of Toronto...that expanded my interest. (Why not support the efforts of local writers.) And, the table of contents secured my purchase: Kukla’s first mental trap was - Persistence.  

Immediately, having a good memory of the details of the Hill classic and being pretty sure Bob Proctor read the chapter on persistence every day for a month, I was intrigued to see persistence holding the #1 mental-trap position. 

The opening paragraph of Kukla's chapter on persistence is: 

'The first trap, persistence, is to continue to work on projects that have lost their value. The activity had meaning for us once - or we would never have begun. But the meaning has evaporated before we reach the end. Yet we go on, either because we don't notice the change or out of sheer inertia.' 

Another quote... 

'Incredibly, our culture teaches us to regard persistence as a virtue'.  

And another... 

'A useful distinction may be drawn between persistence and perseverance. We persevere when we steadfastly pursue our aims despite the obstacles that are encountered along the way. But we merely persist if we doggedly carry on in directions that are known to lead to a dead end.' 

And one more... 

'The moral imperative to finish everything we start is deeply ingrained. We find it difficult to abandon even the most transparently vapid enterprises in midstream. The mere act of beginning already binds us to continue to the end, whether or not the original reasons for the activity remain valid.' 

***

Now, here's how one of my dictionaries defines perseverance and persistence... 

Perseverance: a sticking to a purpose or an aim; never giving up what one has set out to do; persistence 

Persistence: the quality or state of being persistent or the act of persisting....where, in the same dictionary, persistent is defined as: persisting; having lasting qualities, especially in the face of dislike, disapproval, or difficulties 

***

As mentioned above, I was intrigued to see a table of contents citing Persistence as the first mental trap in an 'Overthinker's Guide to a Happier Life' 

To at least some degree, I grew up with Napoleon Hill's philosophies...including his view that Persistence is a necessary step toward riches.  

To put this into perspective, I've read the Napoleon Hill chapter dozens of times while I've read the Kukla chapter a handful of times. So, I believe I fully understand the gory details of Napoleon Hill's thinking and message while I'm much less comfortable with my understanding of Kukla's thinking and message. 

At first-reading of Kukla's differentiation between persistence and perseverance, I thought I was gaining some ground on his views. However, my dictionary removed that.  

My dictionary seems to consider the words persistence and perseverance as more or less interchangeable...note, perseverance is defined as persistence.  

***

So, what is persistence? 

Is it the 8th step to riches?  

Or, is it the first mental trap?   

An attempt at an answer: 

...going back to my dictionary's definition of persistent: persisting; having lasting qualities, especially in the face of dislike, disapproval, or difficulties. 

Specifically, consider the words 'in the face of dislike, disapproval, or difficulties'. 

This may be a good place to begin to sort out the similarities and differences between what these authors are trying to tell us.  

There's no question Napoleon Hill wanted his readers to be persistent in the face of disapproval from others. That's a very major part of the Hill philosophy. He wrote words like, 'never mind what they say' 

And, be persistent in the face of difficulty is another major Hill message....he wrote, 'If you give up before your goal has been reached, you are a "quitter". A quitter never wins - and a winner never quits. Lift that sentence out, write it on a piece of paper in letters an inch high, and place it where you will see it every night before you go to sleep, and every morning before you go to work.' 

What about 'in the face of dislike'? Napoleon Hill had a strong view on what type of work people should do...that is, he felt people should do work that is a labour of love. That doesn't mean Napoleon Hill expected all aspects of one's work would always be enjoyable/liked.  

Napoleon Hill felt people should think, set goals, create detailed plans, and take persistent action to complete those plans.  

Conversely, André Kukla begins his explanation of the mental trap, persistence, with the following example... 

'We start a Monopoly game with great enthusiasm and - inevitably - get bored before we reach the end. But instead of quitting, we toil on without pleasure "just to get it over with". There can be no clearer waste of time.' 

Kukla presents a number of similar examples. Taken on there own, I expect these examples do not do justice to the substance of Kukla's views. He goes on to say... 

'We may perpetually persist at relationships that have turned irretrievably sour, jobs that hold no present satisfaction for us and no hope for the future, old hobbies that no longer bring us pleasure, daily routines that only burden and restrict our lives.' 

Obviously, this last excerpt covers matters of much more significance than monopoly games. 

Napoleon Hill comments on all of these matters too, except the old hobbies. Hill cautioned against carrying on with things like irretrievably sour relationships and jobs that are not satisfying. He had strong views that most people continued with these sorts of things because of fear of criticism.  

So, there is common ground covered by both Kukla and Hill.  

However, there are fundamental differences and they are not explained away by writer’s style or the fact some common ground exists. 

As mentioned above, Kukla states, 'But we merely persist if we doggedly carry on in directions that are known to lead to a dead end.' 

On the other hand, Hill tells the story of how Henry Ford reacted to his engineers after '...the engineers agreed, to a man, that it was simply impossible to cast an eight-cylinder engine-block in one piece'.   

Here is part of the Henry Ford story, as told by Napoleon Hill: 

'...the engineers agreed, to a man, that it was simply impossible to cast an eight-cylinder engine-block in one piece.  

Ford said, "Produce it anyway." 

"But," they replied, "it's impossible!" 

"Go ahead," Ford commanded, "and stay on the job until you succeed, no matter how much time is required." 

The engineers went ahead. There was nothing else for them to do, if they were to remain on the Ford staff. Six months went by, nothing happened. Another six months passed, and still nothing happened. The engineers tried every conceivable plan to carry out the orders, but the thing seemed out of the question; "impossible!" 

At the end of the year Ford checked with his engineers, and again they informed him they had found no way to carry out his orders. 

"Go right ahead," said Ford. "I want it, and I'll have it." 

They went ahead, and then, as if by a stroke of magic, the secret was discovered. 

The Ford determination had won once more!'  

Consider Kukla's definitions...'We persevere when we steadfastly pursue our aims despite the obstacles that are encountered along the way. But we merely persist if we doggedly carry on in directions that are known to lead to a dead end.' 

Under Kukla’s definitions, Napoleon Hill's story about Henry Ford and his engineers contains one man persevering and many men merely persisting.  

Clearly, knowing the single-cast engine block could be done, Henry Ford persevered and that is something Kukla would not describe as falling into a mental trap.  

However, all of Henry Ford's engineers agreed to a man it was simply impossible to single-cast the engine block yet they doggedly carried on with work they ‘knew’ would lead to a dead end. So, the engineers merely persisted. And, Kukla would describe that as activity done in a mental trap.  

Some could argue that example is not a fair-game way of trying to sort out whether persistence is a necessary step towards riches or a destructive mental trap.  

After all…Henry Ford – why that’s just an exceptional example.   

Exactly.

Tags:

Attitude: Creating Positive Attitude | Hero Worship | Influencing

Copyright © 2012. W.F.C (Rick) Baker. All Rights Reserved.